Supreme Court Won't Halt Turnover Of Trump's Tax Records

[Markinsa]

 

.

[yota691]

 

[Shabibilicious]

Trump CFO 'Perjured Himself,' Felt 'Enabled' With Boss In White House: Ex-Daughter-In-Law

 

Mary Papenfuss

·Trends Reporter, HuffPost

Sun, May 30, 2021, 8:10 PM

 

 

Donald Trump’s longtime chief financial officer has “perjured himself” in depositions and felt “enabled” to skirt the law when his boss was in the White House, his former daughter-in-law Jennifer Weisselberg said Sunday.

And he’ll “flip” on Trump to save his two sons, she said on MSNBC. “When it comes down to being 75, you have to look at what’s best for your own family,” Weisselberg added. “The organization has major issues.”

Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and his sons changed “dramatically” when they “came into power with the presidency,” she said.

“It really went to their heads. They were extremely enabled and had no accountability,” she said. “Weisselberg does lie. He has perjured himself with the Presidential Inaugural Committee, with most depositions.”

Now that “there is a personal criminal probe on him and they are going really hard on his children — Barry and Jack. ... He’s going to flip,” said Jennifer Weisselberg, who was married to Barry for 14 years until 2018.

Barry has run Central Park’s Wollman Rink for Trump, and Jack works for a commercial real estate lender that has made several loans to the Trump Organization.

New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) has been conducting a criminal investigation into Allen Weisselberg’s personal taxes for months — and has also launched a criminal probe into the Trump Organization.

A parallel investigation into possible loan, bank and insurance fraud by the Trump Organization and its officers is being carried out by Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance Jr. Weisselberg’s possible role in exorbitant Trump Organization charges to the 2016 inaugural committee is also being probed.

In addition, investigators from both offices have inquired about “untaxed” benefits collected by Allen Weisselberg and son Barry, The Washington Post reported last month. The aim is to convince the Weisselbergs to cooperate with information on Trump, sources have said. None of the Weisselbergs has been accused of wrongdoing.

Jennifer Weisselberg, who has talked to investigators and turned over boxes of financial records and digital information to them, said she was stunned last week when Vance empaneled a special grand jury to consider evidence against the Trump Organization and company officers, including Trump.

“I lost my breath,” she said. “I didn’t realize it was going to happen this soon. I did anticipate it happening” at some point, “but I was shocked.”

 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/jennifer-allen-weisselberg-trump-001050983.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

ABC legal analyst: 'All signs point to a likely indictment' in Trump case

 

 

Brendan Morrow, Staff Writer

Tue, June 1, 2021, 4:06 PM

 

 

 

Donald Trump Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

After Manhattan's district attorney convened a grand jury in an investigation into former President Donald Trump, one legal analyst thinks an indictment appears "likely."

Dan Abrams, ABC News' chief legal analyst, on Tuesday's The View discussed last week's news that Manhattan's district attorney convened a grand jury to weigh whether to indict Trump and other Trump Organization executives amid a probe into the former president's business practices. Abrams argued on The View that "all signs point to a likely indictment," with these signs including the hiring of a "very high-profile prosecutor" to oversee the case and the grand jury being convened.

"Typically, you don't get a special grand jury like this unless they believe they have evidence of a crime," Abrams said, per Mediaite. "So all the evidence, all the signals, are towards a likely indictment of someone, if not more than one person."

In reporting on the fact that a grand jury had been convened, The Washington Post wrote that the move suggested that District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. "thinks he has found evidence of a crime — if not by Trump, by someone potentially close to him or by his company." On The View, Abrams noted that since this probe concerns Trump's conduct as a private citizen and not as president, it's a "very different kind of investigation" than he's faced before.

 

Still, The View's Joy Behar was skeptical, telling Abrams, "As much as I'd like to see [Trump] in an orange jumpsuit, I don't know if it's gonna happen."

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/abc-legal-analyst-signs-point-200647463.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

1 hour ago, Shabibilicious said:

ABC legal analyst: 'All signs point to a likely indictment' in Trump case

 

 

Brendan Morrow, Staff Writer

Tue, June 1, 2021, 4:06 PM

 

 

 

Donald Trump Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

After Manhattan's district attorney convened a grand jury in an investigation into former President Donald Trump, one legal analyst thinks an indictment appears "likely."

Dan Abrams, ABC News' chief legal analyst, on Tuesday's The View discussed last week's news that Manhattan's district attorney convened a grand jury to weigh whether to indict Trump and other Trump Organization executives amid a probe into the former president's business practices. Abrams argued on The View that "all signs point to a likely indictment," with these signs including the hiring of a "very high-profile prosecutor" to oversee the case and the grand jury being convened.

"Typically, you don't get a special grand jury like this unless they believe they have evidence of a crime," Abrams said, per Mediaite. "So all the evidence, all the signals, are towards a likely indictment of someone, if not more than one person."

In reporting on the fact that a grand jury had been convened, The Washington Post wrote that the move suggested that District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. "thinks he has found evidence of a crime — if not by Trump, by someone potentially close to him or by his company." On The View, Abrams noted that since this probe concerns Trump's conduct as a private citizen and not as president, it's a "very different kind of investigation" than he's faced before.

 

Still, The View's Joy Behar was skeptical, telling Abrams, "As much as I'd like to see [Trump] in an orange jumpsuit, I don't know if it's gonna happen."

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/abc-legal-analyst-signs-point-200647463.html

 

GO RV, then BV

So much fear of a man who isn't even in office.....he must be destroyed.....he must be stopped....

 

What a bunch of clucking chickens...!     CL

[Shabibilicious]

16 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

So much fear of a man who isn't even in office.....he must be destroyed.....he must be stopped....

 

What a bunch of clucking chickens...!     CL

 

And yet fawning sycophants flock to him like sheep every minute even though his time in office has long since passed....Seems the barnyard is full of creatures of habit.   

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

‘Delusional’ Trump Mocked On Twitter Over Unhinged New Conspiracy Theory

 

 

Ed Mazza

·Overnight Editor, HuffPost

Wed, June 2, 2021, 4:32 AM

 

 

Donald Trump is reportedly telling those close to him that he expects to be reinstated as president over the summer despite losing the 2020 election.

According to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, Trump has been parroting a recent conspiracy theory that’s been popular among his QAnon followers:

 

One-time Trump adviser Sidney Powell made similar comments over the weekend, CNN reported. However, Powell ― who is being sued for $1.3 billion for her role in disseminating false claims about the 2020 election ― argued in court documents earlier this year that “no reasonable person” would believe her statements were factual.

In any case, there is no legal mechanism to “reinstate” a former president other than winning an election, which Trump did not do.

Michael Flynn, who briefly served as Trump’s national security adviser, recently suggested a coup, although he later denied making the comments that were captured on video, and said he was the victim of “media manipulation.”

Trump’s critics called him out over this wild new claim and all that it implies:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This article originally appeared on HuffPost and has been updated.

 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/donald-trump-reinstated-conspiracy-083202270.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

 

[coorslite21]

28 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

And yet fawning sycophants flock to him like sheep every minute even though his time in office has long since passed....Seems the barnyard is full of creatures of habit.   

 

GO RV, then BV

Sycophants?.....that might not be the right description...

 

Those flocking to the movement Trump got started are all running away fro Joe and his handlers.....call it buyers remorse.....common sense....logic....

 

Trump had/has a better plan.....

Just the facts.....    CL

[Shabibilicious]

2 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

Sycophants?.....that might not be the right description...

 

Those flocking to the movement Trump got started are all running away fro Joe and his handlers.....call it buyers remorse.....common sense....logic....

 

Trump had/has a better plan.....

Just the facts.....    CL

 

That's one opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

Just now, Shabibilicious said:

 

That's one opinion.

 

GO RV, then BV

Yes it is......just 1 opinion....

 

And as you have been asked before.....

 

What is it that Biden is doing for "We the People", and the Country in general that makes you happy and proud that he is the "elected" leader of the free world?

CL

[Shabibilicious]

8 minutes ago, coorslite21 said:

Yes it is......just 1 opinion....

 

And as you have been asked before.....

 

What is it that Biden is doing for "We the People", and the Country in general that makes you happy and proud that he is the "elected" leader of the free world?

CL

 

I just created another thread on one of those positive things.....Feel free to read it and rip it apart.  

 

Also, why is "elected" in quotation marks?

 

GO RV, then BV  

Edited June 2, 2021 by Shabibilicious

[bigwave]

25 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

positive things

Here's one for you:

 

The Award for Worst Political Strategy in History Goes to Republicans Who Sided with Communist-Democrats in Stealing 2020 Election

I know you just love RINO's.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/

[coorslite21]

3 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

 

I just created another thread on one of those positive things.....Feel free to read it and rip it apart.  

 

Also, why is "elected" in quotation marks?

 

GO RV, then BV  

 

I won't rip a thread apart....I'm not Mr. Doom and Gloom here..

Name that positive thread please!    CL

[Markinsa]

3 hours ago, Shabibilicious said:

Also, why is "elected" in quotation marks?

 

 Elected. 

 

How's that?

[markb57]

Not elected. Installed....

[Markinsa]

 

Wayne starts talking about the 3:00 mark.

 

.

[Shabibilicious]

Litman: Whatever Trump's White House counsel finally testifies to, it won't be enough

 

 

Harry Litman

Thu, June 3, 2021, 6:00 AM

 

 

 

Former White House counsel Don McGahn. (Jacquelyn Martin / Associated Press)

On Friday, more than two years after Congress subpoenaed his testimony, Donald Trump’s White House Counsel Don McGahn will finally raise his hand and promise to tell the truth.

But not the whole truth.

The ground rules for McGahn’s testimony have been carefully negotiated to prevent full public disclosure. He will answer questions about the former president’s attempts to shut down special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s Russia investigation, but the testimony will take place behind closed doors before members only (no staff) of the House Judiciary Committee. A transcript will be made public, although only after the House and the Department of Justice have a chance to scrub parts they find objectionable.

 

The content even before it's scrubbed will be sharply constrained. Committee members may ask McGahn only about episodes or information already attributed to him in the public portions of the Mueller report. The Justice Department can assert executive privilege to block questioning, and McGahn himself can object to questions he considers beyond the scope of the agreement.

We can expect McGahn to testify to facts that back up allegations that Trump obstructed justice. Most outrageously, the former president ordered McGahn to fire special counsel Mueller and later to lie about the order. According to the Mueller report, only McGahn’s readiness to resign walked Trump back.

Those facts are not nothing. Details McGahn could provide will make for a sort of official seal on Mueller’s findings and add to Trump’s branding as a criminal in the annals of history.

But it is also much less than it could be and should be.

Of all Trump's assaults on our political system and his derogations of the rule of law, the single most galling is that there remain huge holes in the record of the administration’s abuses, gaps that may never be filled in an authoritative way. The problem extends to Jan. 6, as Republicans fight tooth and nail to prevent a full investigation into the attack on the U.S. Capitol and into what the former president knew, did and said about it.

It should not be controversial to have a full public airing of the facts surrounding the Trump administration's manifold abuses. Other kinds of reckonings may raise competing considerations. It’s debatable, for example, whether a criminal conviction of Trump for his behavior in office would be a good thing for the political health of the nation.

But it is a right of the people to know what happens within and to their government, and that right stands superior to institutional interests of the branches of government. We have recognized its importance time and again when crises, errors and crimes have rocked our democracy. The Japanese American imprisonment of World War II, the John F. Kennedy assassination, Watergate, Iran-Contra, 9/11, Abu Ghraib — all were subject to comprehensive public examination.

Yet what we get on Friday from McGahn, the most important witness in Mueller's obstruction-of-justice revelations, will be far from comprehensive.

There is plenty of blame to go around for this unsatisfactory outcome. Multiple government actors have combined to shortchange the public.

The list begins with Trump, who with the disingenuous support of congressional Republicans advanced spurious constitutional claims to stall for time and keep the truth bottled up.

McGahn himself ignored Congress’ legitimate subpoena power. He was free to testify fully when he was called and remains so but chose instead to hide behind various Trump arguments that as a competent attorney he knew were meritless.

The administration’s bad faith was abetted by the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, which issued two poorly reasoned 2-1 decisions supporting Trump’s claims. The full court reversed the first, and it was poised to hear and reverse the second on May 19, until the McGahn deal intervened.

Even the House Democrats, who were generally sure-footed and aggressive during the Trump years, bear blame for the incomplete record. They agreed to a lousy compromise with McGahn. (It’s likely they were concerned that the full-court D.C. Circuit decisions would be appealed to the Trump-stacked Supreme Court, a prospect they wanted to avoid.)

Finally, the Biden-Garland Department of Justice, by continuing to defend its predecessor’s legal claims against oversight, also worked against the nation’s paramount need to know.

I’ve championed Atty. Gen. Merrick Garland’s “stay in your lane” institutional strategies, but they should be tempered when it comes to uncovering the facts around clear extremes of the Trump White House. The unredacted Mueller report remains under Justice Department control, along with grand jury material that Mueller developed in his investigation. Garland should do all he can to open those files to public view without prejudicing ongoing litigation interests.

For now, we have a woefully inadequate accounting of the events of the Trump years. McGahn's testimony will improve the record, but it will still be too late and far too little.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/litman-whatever-trumps-white-house-100028011.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[patrickgold]

On 6/2/2021 at 9:59 AM, Shabibilicious said:

 

And yet fawning sycophants flock to him like sheep every minute even though his time in office has long since passed....Seems the barnyard is full of creatures of habit.   

 

GO RV, then BV

I guess we like gravitate towards good, liberty, pursuit of happiness, prosperity and toward freedoms.  President Trump stood for this and more.

[caddieman]

On 6/4/2021 at 12:18 AM, patrickgold said:

I guess we like gravitate towards good, liberty, pursuit of happiness, prosperity and toward freedoms.  President Trump stood for this and more.

Your last sentence here is right on track. He did stand for MUCH more!

[patrickgold]

23 minutes ago, caddieman said:

Your last sentence here is right on track. He did stand for MUCH more!

My point exactly! 

[Karsten]

On 6/2/2021 at 9:40 AM, coorslite21 said:

Yes it is......just 1 opinion....

 

And as you have been asked before.....

 

What is it that Biden is doing for "We the People", and the Country in general that makes you happy and proud that he is the "elected" leader of the free world?

CL

 

 

CL, I am pretty sure We The People are all going to have to Circle Back on this one as this question has been asked a Number of time and all Shabs does is Deflect and Spin Things.......
 

In the mean time We the People are Still wanting to hear all the Great Things being Accomplished by joe and the hoe.

 

Karsten

[patrickgold]

7 minutes ago, Karsten said:

 

 

CL, I am pretty sure We The People are all going to have to Circle Back on this one as this question has been asked a Number of time and all Shabs does is Deflect and Spin Things.......
 

In the mean time We the People are Still wanting to hear all the Great Things being Accomplished by joe and the hoe.

 

Karsten

Unfortunately there is no answer to your circle back questions. This party votes for party only, not policies, they'll agree to everything the party wants, even its bad for the people and our future generation of children. The list of wrongful policies is endless,  and continues to increase as each day that passes. 

[Shabibilicious]

Mary Trump Predicts How Donald Trump Will Throw His Children Under The Bus

 

 

Lee Moran

·Reporter, HuffPost

Tue, June 8, 2021, 3:31 AM

 

 

Mary Trump doesn’t doubt that her uncle, ex-President Donald Trump, will sacrifice his own children to save himself from potential prosecution.

On Monday, CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked Mary Trump if her uncle would “take one for his kids” if they were targeted by prosecutors. Both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump work for the Trump Organization, which is under criminal investigation by authorities in New York.

“No, he wouldn’t,” responded the former president’s niece, a vocal critic of her relative.

“I think if that were to happen, if prosecutors were to go after his children, he would fully expect them to take a hit for him, to benefit him. What he probably doesn’t understand is that’s not really how it works,” added the psychologist.

Prosecutors “always try to get people to flip so they can go after the bigger target,” said Mary Trump.

“But Donald would never imagine in a million years that his children would do that, although I’m fairly sure they would,” she explained. “So, if that indeed happens, it’s going to be fascinating because he would never do anything to protect them if it were at his expense.”

“How do you know?” asked Cuomo.

“I’ve known him my whole life and unfortunately, I’ve had to analyze him pretty closely over the last four or five years,” said Mary Trump.

“This is somebody who’s never changed,” she added. “He doesn’t evolve. And as you said earlier, he has one thing he cares about, and that’s himself. That will never, ever change, no matter who gets in his way, no matter who gets hurt, even if it’s his kids.”

Watch the interview here:

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/mary-trump-donald-trump-children-073117319.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[Shabibilicious]

A special grand jury is secretly hearing from witnesses in the Manhattan DA's Trump investigation. Here's how it'll decide whether to bring criminal charges.

Jacob Shamsian

Mon, June 7, 2021, 5:44 PM

 

 

 

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. in 2020. Jeenah Moon/Getty Images

• The Manhattan DA's office convened a "special grand jury" in its Trump investigation last month.

• Jurors will decide whether to criminally charge Trump, the Trump Organization, or its executives.

• Here's a breakdown of how a special grand jury works, as well as what evidence and witnesses will likely come before jurors as they meet in secret.

In a courtroom in downtown Manhattan, the district attorney's office is marshaling paperwork and secretly whisking witnesses in front of a "special" grand jury for what may be one of the most consequential criminal cases in the history of the United States.

The grand jury is "special" in two ways. It'll be convened for six months, rather than one month, which is standard. It also could be asked to do something no one has ever done before: indict a former president.

The Manhattan District Attorney's investigation into Donald Trump's and the Trump Organization's finances appears to have reached an advanced stage. Prosecutors are expected to announce whether they're bringing any criminal charges before the end of the year, and the special grand jury - a group of 23 ordinary citizens - will be the ones to make the final call.

Here's how the process works.

What does a special grand jury do?

The precise rules for grand juries and criminal charges vary by state. Under New York law, which governs the Manhattan District Attorney's office, a felony charge - a criminal charge that would result in a year or more in prison - may go to trial only if a grand jury decides to file an indictment.

A grand jury in New York consists of 23 people. Sixteen jurors must be present in order to make charging decisions, and 12 must vote in favor of bringing an indictment. They must meet in secret and are not permitted to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury. Grand juries can also issue subpoenas and compel witnesses to testify.

Most grand juries meet for one month and hear multiple cases. According to The Washington Post, the Manhattan DA has empaneled a "special" grand jury that will last up to six months in order to hear evidence from the Trump investigation and decide whether to bring an indictment.

Special grand juries are typically empaneled to review evidence for more sophisticated cases like Trump's, which spanned two years and involves possibly millions of pages of documents. Court documents suggest that the office of Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr. has been investigating whether the Trump Organization, its executives, or Donald Trump himself broke tax laws by keeping two sets of books. One set would have shown assets of little value, in order to pay little in taxes; another would have shown significant profits in order to receive favorable loan and insurance rates. Legal experts expect Vance to make a case for tax, bank, and insurance fraud charges.

 

Donald Trump in 2020. MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images

A judge may extend the special grand jury beyond the allotted six months, though Vance is widely expected to announce a charging decision before he retires at the end of December. The special grand jury, like regular grand juries, may also hear more than one case depending on how Vance's office decides to schedule it.

Grand juries are meant to function as a check on government power. Prosecutors need to convince a majority of jurors that there's probable cause to charge someone with a crime; only then can a case go to trial.

"The grand jury was designed to say, 'Hey, wait a minute, government, before you just start taking anybody you feel like to trial and convicting them and tossing them into jail or cutting their heads off, we're going to make you present evidence first and satisfy a group of people to show that we have a case,'" said Randy Zelin, an attorney at Wilk Auslander LLP and former prosecutor.

But in reality, defense lawyers like Zelin say, grand juries almost always agree with prosecutors.

In a trial, a judge oversees the process, defense lawyers can put up a defense or call their own witnesses, and prosecutors must overcome the challenge of getting a jury to reach a unanimous verdict.

But prosecutors determine which witnesses to bring and what evidence to show a grand jury - and the verdict doesn't need to be unanimous.

 

The judge's bench is seen at the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan, New York City, U.S., August 21, 2020. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly

What evidence will jurors review?

Earlier this year, Vance's office won what's likely the biggest prize in their investigation. After two Supreme Court decisions, the district attorney's office was finally able to obtain the Trump Organization's tax documents in February.

Those documents include Trump's tax returns, which he has fought vociferously to keep from the public and which he has repeatedly lied about. Legal experts say the documents also likely include email communications between Trump Organization officials, insurance brokers, third-party accountants, and banks about what would go into those tax returns. If the communications show that Trump Organization officials sought to distort the true value of the company's properties, that could amount to tax and wire fraud, according to the legal experts.

Prosecutors have been examining that documentation for months. Now, they will present those documents as exhibits before the grand jury.

 

Donald Trump, Allen Weisselberg, Donald Trump Jr. TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP via Getty Images

Aside from the subpoenaed tax documents, prosecutors may present jurors with financial documents provided by cooperating witnesses.

Jennifer Weisselberg, the former daughter-in-law of Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, obtained seven boxes of documents as part of an acrimonious divorce from Barry Weisselberg, Allen's son. She gave those documents to prosecutors in the fall, and in interviews with Insider said they may include evidence that Allen Weisselberg distorted employee compensation in a way that may break tax laws.

Barry Weisselberg is also a key Trump Organization employee, as the manager of the cash-only Wollman rink in Central Park. Prosecutors may also be examining documentation about the rink's operations for potential tax fraud, according to people familiar with the investigation.

The financial documents investigators gathered may be complex and difficult for a grand jury to comprehend. That poses a challenge for Vance's office. Under New York state law, prosecutors can't present "hearsay evidence," or prosecutors' personal summaries of the evidence, to grand juries. Instead, prosecutors must provide the underlying documentation directly to the jurors.

 

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. speaks at a news conference about dismissing some 3,000 marijunana smoking and possession cases in New York City, U.S., September 12, 2018. REUTERS/Jeenah Moon

Prosecutors can also get third parties to present evidence, including charts and summaries, for them. Vance's office is working with FTI Consulting, a forensic accounting firm, to analyze Trump's documents, and those accountants may present their analysis to a grand jury.

"There could be summary charts or analyses that are put together by the person who has done that analysis to help the grand jury understand the documents," said Rebecca Ricigliano, a former first assistant attorney general for the state of New Jersey and longtime federal prosecutor in Manhattan. "You see that all the time in regular trials where there's complicated financials or complicated issues concerning voluminous documents."

What witnesses will jurors hear from?

The person or entities under investigation don't have any say in who's called as a witness before a grand jury. It's up to prosecutors to decide who testifies.

By default, anyone who gets called as a witness in front of a grand jury in New York gets "transactional immunity," meaning they get total immunity from prosecution for any possible crimes related to their testimony. Transactional immunity protects people from being subpoenaed and forced to incriminate themselves.

It also means prosecutors need to secure cooperating witnesses before going to a grand jury. The names of some of those witnesses in the DA's investigation are already public.

Michael Cohen, a former Trump Organization executive and personal lawyer for the ex-president, told Insider he's spoken to prosecutors more than a dozen times. Jennifer Weisselberg has helped prosecutors understand the company's inner workings, which she's described as corrupt. Both will likely serve as grand jury witnesses, and both declined Insider's request to discuss their possible role, saying they don't want to jeopardize the legal process.

On Friday, ABC News reported that Vance's office brought Jeff McConney, a senior vice president and controller for the Trump Organization, to testify in front of the special grand jury.

 

Michael Cohen. Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Prosecutors also may have secured less boldfaced names, like tax preparers at Mazers, the firm used by the Trump Organization, or officials at the insurance firm Aon.

It's unclear whether prosecutors have secured cooperation from Allen Weisselberg, who is widely viewed as a potential key witness for the case. He's worked for the Trumps for more than four decades, and knows the company's as well as the family's finances inside and out. Prosecutors reportedly want him to testify about those finances.

But prosecutors wouldn't want to just call Weisselberg as a grand jury witness, which would give him immunity from prosecution for any financial crimes he may have committed in his role as CFO.

Ricigliano noted that people shouldn't assume Weisselberg will make or break the DA's case.

"It's hard to judge whether he's really a make-or-break figure, or if they have been able to compile the evidence they need from multiple other sources," Ricigliano, now an attorney at Crowell & Moring, told Insider. "You can build a case like building a house. You can either get a crane to drop down a prefab house, or you can build it brick by brick."

Does Trump himself play any role?

If Trump himself is a subject of the DA's probe, he wouldn't be called as a grand jury witness. If prosecutors want to charge him, giving him transactional immunity would defeat the purpose of their investigation.

Still, if a lawyer knows their client is a subject of a probe, they can serve a "grand jury notice" to the district attorney's office, Zelin told Insider.

 

Then President-elect Donald Trump boards the elevator at Trump Tower in New York City on January 16, 2017. DOMINICK REUTER/AFP via Getty Images

If that notice is served, prosecutors may be forced to inform the special grand jury that a particular witness named by the defense attorney is willing to testify. The jurors may then decide to subpoena the witness, giving that person transactional immunity against the prosecutors' wishes.

"It's sometimes a sophisticated and savvy move on a defense attorney's part," Zelin said.

To head off that scenario, prosecutors will try to make a deal with potential witnesses - called a cooperation or plea agreement - where they'd testify in front of a grand jury and agree to waive transactional immunity.

"Prosecutors are very strategic in thinking through their presentation of evidence to ensure that they are not immunizing a witness who they shouldn't be immunizing," Ricigliano said.

What charging decisions can the special grand jury make?

It's not clear whether Vance will seek to charge Trump, Trump Organization executives, the company - or not bring charges at all.

Former New York Supreme Court chief judge Sol Wachtler said a grand jury would "indict a ham sandwich" if a prosecutor told them to because of the amount of control they have over the process. Zelin said because of that dynamic, grand juries can offer prosecutors political cover.

If prosecutors don't want to pursue a politically inconvenient case, they can blame the grand jury for not bringing an indictment.

But grand juries can also offer protection: Trump has already attempted to tarnish Vance's investigation by describing it as politically motivated. If a grand jury brings an indictment against Trump, Vance could persuasively say that fellow citizens, not just his office, believe the former president may have committed a crime.

 

Mark F. Pomerantz at the press confernce were former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer announced his resignation March 12, 2008 in New York City. Chris Hondros/Getty Images

Any charging decisions in this case will be controversial. Democrats sore over Trump's apparent ability to wriggle out of every scandal will be further rattled if he isn't personally charged. Trump supporters may be scandalized if he's held responsible for financial wrongdoing that may have been engineered by other executives like Weisselberg.

Daniel R. Alonso, a former top Vance deputy, previously told Insider there's a good chance the DA may ask the grand jury to bring charges against only the Trump Organization.

Charging the Trump Organization alone would be a smart strategic move that would further puncture Trump's image as a successful businessman, possibly cut into his family's reputation, and provoke less backlash from the 74 million people who voted for him, Zelin said.

"An argument could be made that it's more devastating," Zelin said. "If you kill the Trump Organization, basically you kill the Trump family's means and a rather extravagant high-profile and lavish lifestyle."

 

Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance arrives at federal court for a hearing related to President Donald Trump's financial records on October 23, 2019 in New York City. Drew Angerer/Getty Images

Ricigliano told Insider that prosecutors don't typically think about political considerations when they bring cases in front of a grand jury.

She emphasized that prosecutors in Vance's office - as well as prosecutors with New York Attorney General Letitia James' parallel investigation - gathered massive amounts of information over the course of their two-year probe, and the public only is aware of a small fraction of it.

Those prosecutors will ultimately bring the best case they have based on the evidence, she said.

"I don't think that prosecutors view the grand juries as potential scapegoats or ways to alleviate pressure," Ricigliano said. "It's part of the system that's been part of the country since the dawn of the revolution."

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/special-grand-jury-secretly-hearing-214437601.html

 

GO RV, then BV

[coorslite21]

14 minutes ago, Shabibilicious said:

Mary Trump Predicts How Donald Trump Will Throw His Children Under The Bus

 

 

Lee Moran

·Reporter, HuffPost

Tue, June 8, 2021, 3:31 AM

 

 

Mary Trump doesn’t doubt that her uncle, ex-President Donald Trump, will sacrifice his own children to save himself from potential prosecution.

On Monday, CNN’s Chris Cuomo asked Mary Trump if her uncle would “take one for his kids” if they were targeted by prosecutors. Both Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump work for the Trump Organization, which is under criminal investigation by authorities in New York.

“No, he wouldn’t,” responded the former president’s niece, a vocal critic of her relative.

“I think if that were to happen, if prosecutors were to go after his children, he would fully expect them to take a hit for him, to benefit him. What he probably doesn’t understand is that’s not really how it works,” added the psychologist.

Prosecutors “always try to get people to flip so they can go after the bigger target,” said Mary Trump.

“But Donald would never imagine in a million years that his children would do that, although I’m fairly sure they would,” she explained. “So, if that indeed happens, it’s going to be fascinating because he would never do anything to protect them if it were at his expense.”

“How do you know?” asked Cuomo.

“I’ve known him my whole life and unfortunately, I’ve had to analyze him pretty closely over the last four or five years,” said Mary Trump.

“This is somebody who’s never changed,” she added. “He doesn’t evolve. And as you said earlier, he has one thing he cares about, and that’s himself. That will never, ever change, no matter who gets in his way, no matter who gets hurt, even if it’s his kids.”

Watch the interview here:

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/mary-trump-donald-trump-children-073117319.html

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Totally unbiased stuff there.....not worth the space it wastes to post it.....

Pure garbage.....   CL